lusterniafandomcom-20200216-history
Report 1160
Special Report #1160 Skillset: Wyrdenwood Skill: None Org: Shadowdancers Status: Completed Apr 2013 Furies' Decision: We will try to reduce the firing rate of reactionaries from passives, but note it may not be feasible. Problem: Passives are currently triggering reactionaries individually, causing even mundane passives like pixie or barghest to trigger what can be harsh afflictions like stun or aeon. Passive effects like these already have existing counters (love potion, paranoia, disloyalty, killing ents), they do not need to effectively hinder the caster simply by existing, especially considering how many of these passives are absolutely crucial and must be timed exactly to successfully kill a target. 0 R: 0 Solution #1: Passive effects will no longer trigger chemantic and wood reactionaries. Only active abilities. 0 R: 0 Solution #2: Only passives that directly do damage will have a chance to trigger reactionaries. A couple of exceptions will need to be made such as barghest due to the importance of timing the effect, and that one single RNG passive should not reset an entire set up. 0 R: 0 Solution #3: Drastically reduce the % chance for reactionaries to fire on passive skills. Player Comments: ---on 4/23 @ 04:11 writes: #1 would be nice, but ent users do get a portion of their offensive get put away into ents. It would be a bit wrong to ignore it. I'll support #2, no effects ticking on non-damage passive ent attacks. ---on 4/23 @ 04:43 writes: Solution 1 or 2 is fine. ---on 4/23 @ 05:19 writes: I feel this is one of those all or nothing reports. If we go with solution 2, it's got to be all damage causing passives, without exceptions. I'd be ok with solution 1 though ---on 4/23 @ 17:35 writes: My only thoughts about #2 are a) exceptions rarely exist b) damage seems a poor indicator; Banshee, for example, would trigger it, but Spix would not. What if instead ents and other passives simply had a lower chance of ticing it (like 1/10th of an active attack)? There's also the reality you can time your ents when fighting chems so as to make them largely fall together, so that the chance of double-firing reactives is greatly lessened. I think a paradox exists between 'they suck they don't do anything' and 'they fire too often and totally are OP' - at some point they're either 'too good' or 'not good enough', and it feels like they're both being argued! ---on 4/24 @ 01:08 writes: Lower chance of proccing sounds good. ---on 4/24 @ 23:47 writes: Solution 3 added ---on 4/25 @ 20:44 writes: Supported. ---on 5/2 @ 12:06 writes: I think when you compare ent classes, IE: Guardians vs. Wiccans you're looking at a HUGE difference in the number of opportunities for an attack to proc reactionaries. The guardian's one to maybe 5 passive attack per few seconds doesn't even come close to touching a wiccan's 9+ chances for these skills to proc. Even if timed, fae can proc reactionaries individually because they're not a stacked attack, they're 9+ individual attacks. The grand majority of reactionaries aren't game breaking until you get to Aerochem who have some really nasty high level effects that can basically wreck you without much effort. I would rather see 1 put in place but will also support 3 if the chance to proc is very very low. ---on 5/2 @ 15:21 writes: Support 3 ---on 5/4 @ 04:58 writes: This is fine, solution 3. The same thing was done with monks on previous occasions, making each attack in a combo have only 1/3rd of the chance to fire, there being three times as many. A similar scaling down of passive attacks to compensate for their frequency and quantity would be appropriate.